“Cryptoanarchy.” It’s not a new term, but it has sincerely evolved throughout the years as the advancement of the sovereign, personal reserve currency started taking over the financial system and began attracting more and more investment capital from large institutions.
However, the term will eventually be hijacked as the sovereign individuals arise due to the powers granted them by their monetary reserve. Eventually, this will lead to problems that many right now are attempting to counteract by putting thought into the establishment of modern citadels and protective social groups.
The idea of Bitcoin citadels is based on the idea of self-preservation, achieving isolation from the masses and those in power who could potentially harm Bitcoiners. This process of potential harm has already started and it will be impossible to halt because some individuals recognized the underlying dangers that these newly-acquired freedoms can pose. Freedom, in this sense, is absolute because Bitcoin grants absolute freedom. When you hold Bitcoin, you are basically in control of your own personal nuclear missile launch codes. This grants sovereign individuals the ultimate power on this planet.
Libertarian ideology in essence is a contributing factor to the need for citadel thinking, because its non-aggression principle is not often able to solve situations that involve violence. Since the future seems to look unstable, others might lean on the input of anarchocapitalists who are more willing to use their “launch codes” as weapons of mass destruction. This potential threat of violence is so great that the establishment of citadels has become a necessary consideration for many.
Future aspects of monetary transition and its effects are hardly predictable in the current Bitcoin epoch and at least five more years are required to have a clear visual image of what could happen and what the ascent of millions of sovereign individuals will cause in the social hierarchical structure.
Bitcoin has opened Pandora’s box, you only have to attend Hacker’s Congress Paralelní Polis once to understand that. But if you still don’t understand what I am talking about, I will attempt to make it clear.
The Inevitable Future Of Anarchy
It is still debatable whether or not it is possible to achieve a full transition to Bitcoin sovereignty without a potential destructive process playing out. The future’s outcome will solely depend upon whether or not we are able to enforce our core principles, unwritten code of honor and ethics upon others in order to make radical ideology unsustainable and unprofitable in the long run. (As I have mentioned, those “launch codes” come with great responsibility. Using them irresponsibly leads to total personal annihilation, either reputationally, honor-wise or ethically.)
Today’s world is already marred in widespread corruption and underground organizations that are clearly criminal in their behavior. Mafia organizations, motorcycle gangs, armed cartels and terrorist organizations (and more) will still exist in the future. With the advancement of decentralized marketplaces and the sustained presence of darknet markets, some individuals or criminal organizations might become intrigued by these marketplaces’ limitless potential at achieving less ethical and moral goals.
This is a problem, because it is a cold harsh reality that is incompatible with the ideals held by the majority of Bitcoiners who think the State will always be there to protect them. (This is a big fallacy of State dependency.) This is why it is becoming inevitable that self-defense groups with shared interests will begin to appear. (It is already happening, since #FreedomMaximalists on Matrix is a thing now.)
Armed violence will be present and will be an ever-increasing danger of tomorrow. It is therefore unwise to live in bubbles and not talk about these problems openly, like treating the topic as a quasi taboo. It is highly likely that the future will breed hatred and extreme distrust that will end with violence among Bitcoiners as they will start building out the playing fields of power structures. Most of these cases will have very clear resemblances to today’s organized crime groups, operating in similar ways to the Sinaloa Cartel or the Hell’s Angels motorcycle club.
During my time researching social organization, the question of the future related to violence has lingered. Anarchocapitalists will likely not shy away from the use of violence to reach their end goals if they feel that their presence and future operations are endangered, especially if business goals are hindered by opponents. Assassinations will be, sadly, a possible occurrence in the future. High-profile Bitcoiners will face high costs for personal safety and physically-armed protection. (This has been proven by the recent Ledger customer list leak, as many of those customers received abduction and murder threats.)
Privacy-focused Bitcoiners who do not meet in real life will likely be more shielded than those who actively organize in the open. Extended friend circles with high level of trust will serve as a more effective layer of protection, but the problem is that we are running out of time — the influx of new arrivals has begun and it will be potentially difficult to build out strong enough connections without having negative effects play out, motivated by greed or financial biases. (I should note that this is still being observed and a predicted possibility in the present. I am personally hoping that it is not going to be a hindering factor to forming interpersonal relationships among Bitcoiners.)
It is natural that Bitcoin has given a boost to Deterrence Dispensed and that 3D-printed firearms will play an important role in the defense of private property in countries that restrict the ownership of firearms. It now rests on legislators’ aptitude to effectively hinder the ability of individuals to protect themselves or to start introducing new legislation to allow their citizens to bear arms. However, it seems unlikely that there will be any such rights granted to anyone in the future in highly-restrictive countries.
Choosing The Bitcoin Path
It is common for Bitcoiners to face aggression and it will be up to each individual to determine how they will handle it. There is essentially no right or wrong way, but just what we can tolerate or allow based on our own beliefs.
But this shouldn’t disillusion people from participating fully in Bitcoin — the future is still brighter than ever and we must remain strong. We should not sacrifice our ability to engage in neighborly behavior (either by retreating to citadels or otherwise) while upholding our code of honor and ethical standards. We should not give space for those who seek to sow hostilities among us, because that will directly accelerate us to the path of violence. We should stand by our friends, brothers and sisters in arms, as we seek a path ahead, as Bitcoin slowly changes the world for the ultimate better. Bitcoiners are ultimately diverse and united in their goals; petty agendas should not serve as the basis of long-lasting hostile disagreement.
In the end, some governments will likely make desperate attempts to halt Bitcoin in its terminal progress toward fulfilling its destiny, and if that were to happen, Bitcoiners will have to unite for the last time before their social organization structure becomes obsolete. That would then become part of human history as the greatest revolution that mankind has ever managed to pull off in the face of overwhelming opposition.
So, remember: Bitcoin held in the wrong hands can be a dangerous weapon, but in the right ones, it’s a tool that can establish long-lasting peace that will serve as the foundation of the future.
This is a guest post by Karo Zagorus. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.